Eneathedevil

No, you haven't quite understood... you see, we've already let her escape :)

"The late Stratos, MAY HE BE PRAISED"? Come on, damn, come out... now even as an ordinary man named "Francesco" you're disguising yourself... come on

No, gheiazzo tagliagole, I'm thinking of ONE... :)

@Lucio: as mentioned, I agree; @TomSkar: it’s valid what was said by odra; @Josi_ and odra: thaaaank you... tell the truth, odra, we like each other :)

@ Immacolata (I’ve figured out who you are, lately you seem to enjoy taking on other identities, huh? :D): Scarnina maybe yes, even though I believe I’ve condensed in those few lines all the pieces and characteristics of the albums and De Gregori of that time, but I don’t agree on the gratuitousness; rather, lately it seems that some praises from kids just approaching FdG’s music are the gratuitous ones, attributing him so many merits without knowing anything about that deeply amazed soul from thirty years ago, that fairy-tale wonder of living that could take shape in a small tragedy like "Babbo in prigione," indeed. Now De Gregori no longer speaks of fairy tales, he is schematic, rigid, politicized. Before, even politics was simplified: think of "Pablo" and "Ninetto e la Colonia" from "Rimmel" and "Bufalo Bill"... and in my opinion, we’ve lost that De Gregori. Not that he has lost his flair, for heaven’s sake.

ah.. um, welcome devotchka :)

No, no, devochka, we’re just not on the same page. The cliché of the day, or rather the current commonplace, is not so much that the book is better than the movie, but that a comparison between the film and the book is necessary at all costs. And this is an inconceivable thing; it offends both cinema and reading. Every film exists as a standalone entity and does not need comparisons with a book: there’s nothing that states Boyle has to strictly adhere to the structure and ethics of the book; he was inspired by it, and even though I haven’t read the work, I feel I can judge this film as a good film, certainly capable of conveying a series of images so raw and burning that it can be considered, tout court, a quality product. And when a film doesn’t follow the morality of the book, for me, it’s an additional reason to be interested in seeing how the director has given a personal interpretation of the work itself: if he did everything by the book, who knows how boring that would be. But assuming I wanted to follow your reasoning, where’s all this irony? All this "let's get high under the sky of Edinburgh"? I laughed for three quarters of an hour, then the film is tragic in its "semi-serious" rawness, in its cleanliness, and in how the overdose is presented to us, in its grim squalor, it seems to me that there is indeed a negative message. And given that, you should argue your points a bit better, because you’ve used so few words.

Some speak well of it, though. Well, perhaps it requires some listening before jumping to conclusions... and yet I don't really trust it.

Very interesting, Lucio; of course I didn't know Schipa jr at all, I knew about his father, one of the most celebrated at the beginning of the century. Well done.

But did Cena really dare to do something like that? And to slap the WWE logo on it too? What a shame... of course, women's wrestling is much better, if and when they push it in prime time, given that Torrie Wilson and her friends are often not the epitome of decency... certainly more decent than a Batista in tight shorts and a creatine-filled chest...